Comments

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.

Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.

Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.
Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.
Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.BuckoTheMoose

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.

Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.

Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.

Score: 0

Info-warrior
10:07pm Thu 29 Nov 12

BuckoTheMoose wrote…

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.

Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.

Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.

Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.

Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.

[quote][p][bold]BuckoTheMoose[/bold] wrote:
Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.
Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.
Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.[/p][/quote]Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.
Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.Info-warrior

BuckoTheMoose wrote…

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.

Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.

Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.

Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.

Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.

Score: 0

Pendlesider
10:33pm Thu 29 Nov 12

just trivialises smoking. gives the impression the product is cheap and harmless. its not the packaging that's appealing to potential or existing smokers, a bottle of jack daniels is still a bottle of jack daniels without its logo. people will still buy them, even if the plain packaging said 'cancer sticks' on the packet! all due to successive governments failing to act sooner (remember, cigerretes were smoked by doctors (and patients in hospital) in the 60',70s..

just trivialises smoking. gives the impression the product is cheap and harmless. its not the packaging that's appealing to potential or existing smokers, a bottle of jack daniels is still a bottle of jack daniels without its logo. people will still buy them, even if the plain packaging said 'cancer sticks' on the packet! all due to successive governments failing to act sooner (remember, cigerretes were smoked by doctors (and patients in hospital) in the 60',70s..Pendlesider

just trivialises smoking. gives the impression the product is cheap and harmless. its not the packaging that's appealing to potential or existing smokers, a bottle of jack daniels is still a bottle of jack daniels without its logo. people will still buy them, even if the plain packaging said 'cancer sticks' on the packet! all due to successive governments failing to act sooner (remember, cigerretes were smoked by doctors (and patients in hospital) in the 60',70s..

Score: 0

Good call
11:33pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Info-warrior wrote…

BuckoTheMoose wrote…

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.

Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.

Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.

Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.

Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.

It will take an economic collapse for the sheeple to wake up to what is going on.

[quote][p][bold]Info-warrior[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]BuckoTheMoose[/bold] wrote:
Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.
Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.
Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.[/p][/quote]Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.
Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.[/p][/quote]It will take an economic collapse for the sheeple to wake up to what is going on.Good call

Info-warrior wrote…

BuckoTheMoose wrote…

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.

Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.

Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.

Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.

Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.

It will take an economic collapse for the sheeple to wake up to what is going on.

Score: 0

woolywords
1:06am Fri 30 Nov 12

In another survey of 2000 people 63% said that they were in favour of plain packaging, which is to be introduced in Austalia tomorrow(Sat). However, how many of those same people would like to have open/visible sales removed from local shops, I wonder. Currently, only supermarkets are obliged to hide tobacco products from general view.
Children are more likely to be age challenged in supermarkets than many of the corner shops, as is evinced by the many times that small retailers are caught out by Trading Standards sample buys. These same shops are more likely to be a source of illegally imported or manufactured tobacco or cigarettes.
Since a license is required to sell both alcohol and tobacco, why is this never revoked when the retailer is caught selling either item to underage teens? My driving license would go on first conviction for being over the alcohol limit. Or is public protection not within the remit of those purporting to be the watchmen of the society?
It seems to me as though dubious standards are being set here, from the sale of fireworks, tobacco and alcohol, that nobody seems to want to tackle head on. Our legislation on drugs is another fine example of how the whole system is totally flawed and in need of overhaul.

In another survey of 2000 people 63% said that they were in favour of plain packaging, which is to be introduced in Austalia tomorrow(Sat). However, how many of those same people would like to have open/visible sales removed from local shops, I wonder. Currently, only supermarkets are obliged to hide tobacco products from general view.
Children are more likely to be age challenged in supermarkets than many of the corner shops, as is evinced by the many times that small retailers are caught out by Trading Standards sample buys. These same shops are more likely to be a source of illegally imported or manufactured tobacco or cigarettes.
Since a license is required to sell both alcohol and tobacco, why is this never revoked when the retailer is caught selling either item to underage teens? My driving license would go on first conviction for being over the alcohol limit. Or is public protection not within the remit of those purporting to be the watchmen of the society?
It seems to me as though dubious standards are being set here, from the sale of fireworks, tobacco and alcohol, that nobody seems to want to tackle head on. Our legislation on drugs is another fine example of how the whole system is totally flawed and in need of overhaul.woolywords

In another survey of 2000 people 63% said that they were in favour of plain packaging, which is to be introduced in Austalia tomorrow(Sat). However, how many of those same people would like to have open/visible sales removed from local shops, I wonder. Currently, only supermarkets are obliged to hide tobacco products from general view.
Children are more likely to be age challenged in supermarkets than many of the corner shops, as is evinced by the many times that small retailers are caught out by Trading Standards sample buys. These same shops are more likely to be a source of illegally imported or manufactured tobacco or cigarettes.
Since a license is required to sell both alcohol and tobacco, why is this never revoked when the retailer is caught selling either item to underage teens? My driving license would go on first conviction for being over the alcohol limit. Or is public protection not within the remit of those purporting to be the watchmen of the society?
It seems to me as though dubious standards are being set here, from the sale of fireworks, tobacco and alcohol, that nobody seems to want to tackle head on. Our legislation on drugs is another fine example of how the whole system is totally flawed and in need of overhaul.

Score: 0

Info-warrior
7:30am Fri 30 Nov 12

Good call wrote…

Info-warrior wrote…

BuckoTheMoose wrote…

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.

Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.

Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.

Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.

Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.

It will take an economic collapse for the sheeple to wake up to what is going on.

So we are looking at about mid December..

[quote][p][bold]Good call[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Info-warrior[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]BuckoTheMoose[/bold] wrote:
Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.
Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.
Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.[/p][/quote]Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.
Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.[/p][/quote]It will take an economic collapse for the sheeple to wake up to what is going on.[/p][/quote]So we are looking at about mid December..Info-warrior

Good call wrote…

Info-warrior wrote…

BuckoTheMoose wrote…

Yes but 500,000 people nationwide have signed the petition against plain packaging. Probably because they realize it all a load of illiberal rubbish.

Deliberately targeting children with glitzy packaging? Pull the other one.

Tobacco free futures is just another tax leach.

Plain packaging is a lot easier for the bootleggers to copy than fancy gltzy packs so its another opening for the criminally intent to flourish just as with the minimum booze price fixing.

Put criminals in charge and all you can expect to prosper is criminality. If the sheeple grow some balls and wake up to whats going on around them then there could be a chance of surviving this Authoritarian rule.

It will take an economic collapse for the sheeple to wake up to what is going on.

So we are looking at about mid December..

Score: 0

Izanears
10:25am Fri 30 Nov 12

Another example of the nanny state. After plain ciggy packets comes the minimum price for alchohol. Beer and wine that is, not spirits. Those in Westminster don't want to upset their pals in the whisky business. How many more do we have to have before people wake up to what is happening.
Incidentally will the minimum apply to the subsidised bars in the Houses of Parliament?

Another example of the nanny state. After plain ciggy packets comes the minimum price for alchohol. Beer and wine that is, not spirits. Those in Westminster don't want to upset their pals in the whisky business. How many more do we have to have before people wake up to what is happening.
Incidentally will the minimum apply to the subsidised bars in the Houses of Parliament?Izanears

Another example of the nanny state. After plain ciggy packets comes the minimum price for alchohol. Beer and wine that is, not spirits. Those in Westminster don't want to upset their pals in the whisky business. How many more do we have to have before people wake up to what is happening.
Incidentally will the minimum apply to the subsidised bars in the Houses of Parliament?

Score: 0

chas
3:57pm Fri 30 Nov 12

It depends on who asks the question and what question was asked. An anti-prohibition group found that the majority of people opposed plain packaging.
I don't see plain package supporters demanding to get smoking back inside pubs and clubs to keep cigarettes and smoking out of sight of youngsters.

It depends on who asks the question and what question was asked. An anti-prohibition group found that the majority of people opposed plain packaging.
I don't see plain package supporters demanding to get smoking back inside pubs and clubs to keep cigarettes and smoking out of sight of youngsters.chas

It depends on who asks the question and what question was asked. An anti-prohibition group found that the majority of people opposed plain packaging.
I don't see plain package supporters demanding to get smoking back inside pubs and clubs to keep cigarettes and smoking out of sight of youngsters.

Score: 0

Bill C
7:27pm Fri 30 Nov 12

More gargage from the nanny state. You can apply the same theory to other so called unhealthy choices such as alcohol or fatty foods. When will our politician's learn, of all persuasions, that they are not elected to determine what lifestyle choices the electorate make.

Concentrate on getting our economy back and stop wasting our tax pounds on illiberal initiatives that are PLAINLY ridiculous suggestions from the Tobacco Control industry.

More gargage from the nanny state. You can apply the same theory to other so called unhealthy choices such as alcohol or fatty foods. When will our politician's learn, of all persuasions, that they are not elected to determine what lifestyle choices the electorate make.
Concentrate on getting our economy back and stop wasting our tax pounds on illiberal initiatives that are PLAINLY ridiculous suggestions from the Tobacco Control industry.Bill C

More gargage from the nanny state. You can apply the same theory to other so called unhealthy choices such as alcohol or fatty foods. When will our politician's learn, of all persuasions, that they are not elected to determine what lifestyle choices the electorate make.

Concentrate on getting our economy back and stop wasting our tax pounds on illiberal initiatives that are PLAINLY ridiculous suggestions from the Tobacco Control industry.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here